| Abstract | This thesis seeks to explore the hybrid nature of Social Enterprises (SEs) by
investigating how they incorporate co-existence of social and economic goals and
embed in multiple institutional domains. By synthesising insights from three literature domains - hybrid organisations, institutional views and strategic management - this thesis advances the understanding about the hybrid nature of SEs mainly in two ways. First, it examines the extent to which managerial tensions may result in hybrid SEs due to co-existence of values and influences from pluralistic institutional
domains. Second, it explores how such organisations mobilise resources and capabilities in order to respond to internal tensions. The three research questions
addressed in the thesis are: i) What is the nature of SE growth in Bangladesh?; ii) How does the institutional context influence SE growth in Bangladesh? and iii) What role do SEs’ resources and capabilities play in responding to the institutional influences? The study adopts a multiple case study approach, collecting data from eleven Bangladeshi SEs. With rapid rise of hybrid forms of SEs in Bangladesh, the
findings of the study have both practical and policy implications. The insights on SEs’ internal tensions can enable Bangladeshi policy makers to realise the needs and challenges of hybrid SEs in the country. This may aid the development of customised policies, incentives and support systems that are required to facilitate the growth of such organisations. The insights on the management of tensions can aid the leaders and managers in hybrid SEs to respond to their internal tensions more
appropriately.The study identifies six operational models through analysis of the
social goal, economic mission, income source, governance structure and institutional setting of the studied cases. These models are: SEs that are fully reliant on grant, NGOs with trading elements, NGOs with full reliance on trading, social business
es, public and private limited corporations, and NGOs with conventional subsidiary enterprise. The findings further showed that the studied SEs have pursued social and economic goals simultaneously through adoption of four growth strategies: expansion, diversification, autonomous growth and partnership. The study identifies a
number of competing pressures originating from multiple institutional domains which
have affected the way they accomplished their social and economic goals. This interplay between SEs’ dual goals and institutional influences led to ten different tensions inside the studied cases. The management of these tensions, at the functional level, involved orchestration of SEs’ resources and capabilities in a particular way.
The specific ways of mobilisation of resources and capabilities ultimately led
the SEs towards five different growth paths: i) forced adoption/coercive adoption, ii) proactive response, iii) adapt, iv) influence, and v) side-stepping. |
|---|